ArticleCancer medicine2026
Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Molecular Profiling and Management of Advanced Solid Tumors: A Real-World Experience in a Community-Based Academic Cancer Center.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdvances in molecular and cell biology have led to a paradigm shift in cancer management. We implemented next-generation sequencing (NGS) at our community-based academic cancer center over a decade ago. We sought to optimize the use of genomics and understand its impact in identifying actionable genomic alterations to determine therapy options in patients with advanced solid tumors for whom standard therapies had been exhausted.
methodsThrough a prospective non-randomized trial, patients with advanced solid tumors who had exhausted standard therapies and who did not qualify for routine guideline-concordant NGS at the time of the study (the study excluded at least Stage 1B lung and Stage IV colorectal cancers) underwent in-house NGS on tumor specimens to identify actionable alterations, and pharmacogenomic testing. Our in-house-developed/integrated bioinformatics pipeline (Flype) was used for structured reporting and served as a molecular knowledgebase. Patients were presented at a multidisciplinary molecular tumor board.
results251 patients underwent somatic tissue NGS. 173 patients (68.9%) had alterations targetable with FDA-approved or currently investigational drugs. 75 patients (29.9%) had alteration(s) qualifying them for FDA-approved drug(s) for their tumor type. An additional 61 patients (24.3%) had alterations qualifying them for "off-label" use of FDA-approved drugs. 40 patients (15.9%) qualified for tumor-agnostic therapies. Of the 224 patients (89.2%) who had RNA analysis, eight (3.6%) had targetable fusions. Of the 33 patients (19.1%) who received NGS-guided targeted therapies, 19 (57.6%) were on treatment for longer than three months. 255 patients underwent pharmacogenomics testing, with over 40% having an alteration in typical response to opioids or antidepressants.
conclusionsIn this real-world study, 54.2% of patients with advanced solid tumors were identified as candidates for FDA-approved therapies (on- or off-label), supporting the utility of in-house NGS in providing genomics-guided care for patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.